Yesterday at I/O Google had an interesting talk called Background Check and Other Insights into the Android Operating System Framework. It's a long name, but really it's about improving battery life in Android. It went on at great length as to how, exactly, the team plans on doing that, and it's quite worth a watch. We have the video here, but if you don't have the half-hour to check it out, then you are welcome to read below.

The central methodology Google is using to try to improve things is the idea of visibility. When something is running in the background and doing a ton of stuff like calling your location at quick intervals, it results in battery drain. So now Google wants to change how things happen in the background, by ensuring that free-running background services aren't sucking your battery dry. Background apps will be pushed out of memory when they leave the foreground, and requests for things like location or WiFi happening in the background will only occasionally see new information from Android. Applications that would otherwise receive broadcasts also might not wake up unless they are given an explicit call to do so in the broadcast, although there are some exceptions. Apps can still get around this by being foregrounded in some way, but now that will be something visible that the user is aware of.

This focus on visibility for apps will also mean developers will have to make decisions about what is really better to the user. If doing an ongoing notification as a means of bypassing the stuff above would confuse a user, is that really the right thing for them to do in that case? Other tools can be used to schedule your tasks ahead of time or to wait for events like the job intent service that developers can use in both pre and post-O environments. Jobs and alarms also allow the OS to defer. So, if something happens that would trigger a bunch of other apps to wake up, like a new picture being taken, that can be passed to those apps one at a time after a delay. That way the user doesn't suddenly have a ton of performance issues and drain out of nowhere.

Basically, Google wants to solve some of the problems with battery life by defining bad behaviors for developers, like persistent background services or accidental leaks to the background of typically foregrounded activities, and make it clear that things have to be done the right way going forward or their stuff won't work. But it's also giving them new tools and choices for how to best accomplish the things they need to do. The new features in the Play Console and in Android Studio should also help developers be aware of when they are making these mistakes so that they can be fixed. It's a matter of visibility for the developers as well as visibility for the users. To paraphrase Steve Balmer: Visibility, visibility, visibility.

A significant user-facing change of this visibility mindset is a new battery menu in O, with a focus on actionable interaction. Instead of just seeing stuff like Screen and Google Play Services next to a number that they won't understand, now users will be given ways of interacting with that data if they don't like it, and can better see how they are using applications without needing to do a bunch of mental calculations. So, when a user has a problem with their expectations of battery performance and goes looking to see what might be causing it, they are more likely to find what caused it, understand what it means, and take action about it.

All of these changes are in pursuit of Google's holy grail: multi-day battery life. Right now the tools in software aren't all there, but these are steps that can take us in that direction.

Comments

xtremevicky

Cool. Good feature to take from iOS

Knowledgeborn Allah

This does seem similar to what Apple implemented in iOS, but I'm curious about how this will impact RAM management. If it reduces the cache file too much, it'll just close the application completely, and you'll have to start over every time you want to use the app again. Apple somehow found a way around this problem, even in devices with less RAM, but I'm not too sure how Google will accomplish this. Even "doze" on my Pixel XL kills apps in the background all the time. This new thing sounds it could potentially make the problem worse.

Justin Osborne

Well I sure can tell a difference since upgrading, that's for sure. The new battery section makes me feel a lot better about how the battery is looking.

But that's where it ends. Today, I got a full hour less out of my battery than normal. 2 hours vs 3-3.5 on the Pixel.

That said, it's a beta, so I'm not complaining. It's definitely not the direction I want to go tho (nor are these new emoticons, sigh).

marcusmarcus2

"Google's holy grail: multi-day battery life."
I'm glad, but can we get a two pronged attack to address this. Yes, Google needs to keep improving the software side, but OEMs need to help out and quit making thinner phones. They are thin enough, give us more battery capacity.

AbdulB1

actually they save quite a lot by putting small batteries in the phones instead of big ones.

Krzysztof Jozwik

I'm not sure you read OP's comment. Nothing was said about saving...

AbdulB1

smaller capacity battery is much cheaper

marcusmarcus2

My original comment was not about savings, cheapness, cost, etc.

Jack Jennings

You've said the same thing twice for no reason.

Krzysztof Jozwik

I wouldn't say "much" I'm no expert on the matter, but last I checked replacement batteries aren't that expensive, and I don't have the buying power of an oem

AbdulB1

Most phones today dont have replacement batteries, they have unremovable ones. OEM or no OEM a 3000mAh battery will always be cheaper than 4000mAh one.

marcusmarcus2

I can find batteries for my different Moto G phones that have "Non-User replaceable batteries" for nearly the same price as my LG phones that have user replaceable batteries online. Most likely the OEMs can get them for about the same as well so replaceable or not really does not matter. Either way, yes a 3000mAh battery will be cheaper than a 4000mAh one for OEMs, but probably not much at all, especially at the volume they would by at. I'm guessing they are choosing smaller batteries to make their phones thinner and not because it is slightly cheaper for them. Thinness is better to advertise to most consumers as most consumers are drawn to looks over functionality now a days. I still prefer function over looks for my devices.

Krzysztof Jozwik

And non replaceable will always be cheaper than replaceable.
The point is, the batteries aren't the bulk of the cost.

What the hell is your point? He never said anything about cost, he was just talking about stop making phones thinner for design and aesthetic reasons.

james fuston

The idea that smaller and thinner phones result in less battery life is a bit of a misnomer. For an example, I'd refer you to the iPhone SE.

marcusmarcus2

I never said smaller and thinner. I just said thinner. They could make some of the phones the same height and width as the current one but make it a little thicker to give a thicker battery, and that would help with the battery life.

james fuston

Okay, but your general sentiment is still that battery life is tied directly to physical size which, again stating my example of the iPhone SE, isn't the case. The power draw of the components is far more important than the physical size of the phone.

marcusmarcus2

My general sentiment is ONLY in regards to thickness of the phone. My sentiment is not to width or height, which also make up the size of the phone. The width and height is usually determined more by the screen where thickness is more often do to battery. A larger screen (component) will draw more power than a smaller screen, I agree with you there. But you seem to think the size of the battery does not make a difference, please correct me if I am wrong.
Using your example of iPhone SE, if they would have made that a little thicker than it is now by making the battery larger, that would have made the battery life even longer than it already is. That is my point.

james fuston

> A larger screen (component) will draw more power than a smaller screen, I agree with you there.

Let me give this one more shot. "your general sentiment is still that battery life is tied directly to physical size which, again stating my example of the iPhone SE, isn't the case"

To break out the pieces, battery life is tied...to physical size...which, again...isn't the case. In other words, we do not agree. The iPhone SE is the exact same size as the iPhone 5S and it gets 30%+ better battery life purely through efficiency in components. To say high mAh results in long battery life is a misnomer that the G6 or V20 should be a clear reminder of. You also cannot equate physical size to battery capacity as energy density is not a universal measurement.

marcusmarcus2

You are comparing different phones with different components. I agree with you that component efficiency has an effect on battery life. But...
Let me give you one more shot. We will use your iPhone SE for this. If there were 2 versions of the SE. Both have the exact same components except one has a battery that is 1000 mAh larger than the other (thus making it slightly thicker), than the one with the larger battery would have more battery life, Thus the thicker one would have better battery life. That is what I am saying. I'm not comparing large phones to small phones. I'm saying if they had a larger battery in a phone with the exact same specs/components then the battery life would be better. That is all my point was. Do you not agree with that?

EDIT: Yes, size of the battery may not increase with capacity due to density, but it usually will increase in size as it does increase in capacity, especially if it increases a lot.

Again, you're talking about it being smaller. The iPhone SE gets good battery life because it has a 4" screen. The complaint is that phones are getting THINNER. Meaning that they still have 5.5-6" displays, but are thinner and translate to smaller batteries.

james fuston

Nope, not at all. The cell in the SE is about 50mAh bigger than the 5S (which is the exact same size). The 30%+ battery life improvement comes from more efficient components, not just their size.

marcusmarcus2

Technically it is 2 dimensional train of thought.

Also, if they increased it horizontally or vertically, then they would most likely have to increase the dimensions of the phone horizontally or vertically, thus changing the size of the screen or bezel. Increasing it thickness wise means they would not have to change the look of the of the front of the phone.

Anywho, I'm only talking about thickness, not height, width, different components, different phones, not small phones or big phones. I'm talking just battery capacity, if all other components remain the same. Thickening the battery would add battery capacity without changing the over all look much at all. It could be any phone of your choosing. If adding a thicker/higher capacity battery to whatever 1 phone you want, that phone would have a longer battery life. Do you not agree with that logic?

you are right, that is 1 dimensional thinking. I read it wrong. And you are right I miss the joke as I do not see what is funny.
I'm glad you know that thickness is depth, but when referring to phones, depth is commonly referred to as thickness.

Anyways, You are the one that is applying 3 dimensional thinking when my general sentiment was only referring to 1 dimension, thus you pretty much accused me of referring it to all dimensions, when I was not. Now you are complaining I'm only applying it to 1 dimension. Which is it?https://68.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lmbq2nuTrp1qcr8tuo1_500.gif

In all seriousness though. I AM only referring to 1 dimension, thickness or depth (whichever you want to go by). Then they can fit a thicker battery in to increase its capacity without having to get a higher cost denser battery and without changing the over all look of the phone. Compare that to getting a battery that is larger in height and/or width, that phone would need to be designed with either a larger bezel (which would most likely make the phone look bad) or use a larger screen (which would most likely be less power efficient which would negate some of the extra battery capacity).

james fuston

> you are right I miss the joke as I do not see what is funny.

Missing the joke and not seeing the joke as funny are two different things, but the joke wasn't really meant for you either way.

> I'm glad you know that thickness is depth, but when referring to phones, depth is commonly referred to as thickness

Yes, this is referred to as a "synonym" in the English language.

> You are the one that is applying 3 dimensional thinking when my general sentiment was only referring to 1 dimension, thus you pretty much accused me of referring it to all dimensions

I'm not sure you understand how to use "thus."

To recap; you said the way to make battery life longer was to make phones thicker. I said you shouldn't conflate (that means mistakenly associate) thickness with battery life, as the physical size of a battery can also be increased with an adjustment in width or height of a phone. Not sure how you got me "[accusing you] of referring it to all dimensions" out of that.

I can tell now that your argument originates from the fact that you don't like bezels and aren't crazy about large screens, but also want longer battery life. The reality here is that the majority of people disagree with you and would care significantly if their next phone was substantially thicker than their current phone, largely due to the fact that increased thickness makes curved-edged or "bezel less" phones significantly harder to hold.

marcusmarcus2

>Yes, this is referred to as a "synonym" in the English language.
Yes, we both agree on the fact it means the same. I just wasn't sure why you pointed out it is the same as depth when that seems to have been obvious to both of us.

Maybe I did not use 'thus' correctly, but I'm sure you know what I meant and just don't want to address it.

>To recap; you said the way to make battery life longer was to make phones thicker. I said you shouldn't conflate (that means mistakenly associate) thickness with battery life, as the physical size of a battery can also be increased with an adjustment in width or height of a phone. Not sure how you got me "[accusing you] of referring it to all dimensions" out of that.

How do you not get you, you just repeated it? I was only referring to 1 dimension and you are trying to apply more dimensions to, which would change the over all look of the phone which would make people that like that phone not want that phone any more, whatever the phone was to begin with. Also, your recap is incorrect. I just said phones should be thicker for better battery life, meaning the thickness should come because of a thicker battery. Your response was address "smaller AND thinner phones" meaning you were applying other dimensions to the thickness which would make it a different phone with most likely different parts.

>I can tell now that your argument originates from the fact that you don't like bezels and aren't crazy about large screens

Half right and half wrong. I don't like bezels. I do like large screens though. I'm not referring to big phones or small phones. I'm refering to and phone compared to itself but thicker. You are the one comparing different size (width and height) phones. My point is you don't have to change the look of whatever phone you like if you just increase the thickness, whether that phone is large or small.

When a company releases 2 choices of the same phone with only the thickness/battery being different (same screen size, storage, RAM, processor, etc.) then we can see if people really do feel about thickness over battery life)

Sk0ly

You can't compare between OSs. There is a reason Android uses more battery, it features true multitasking and doesn't drastically limit background processes like iOS. Looks like Google is going a bit to the Apple approach going forward as devs can't be counted on to write decent code.

james fuston

Seeing as we're talking about physical dimensions and hardware specifications and they're effect on power draw, you absolutely can compare between operating systems. Processors aren't suddenly able to use more power than they're designed to use just because you've installed a different operating system.

Jason B

"Processors aren't suddenly able to use more power than they're designed to use just because you've installed a different operating system."

Just to jump in: sure, they won't use more than their design power, but they can be used very inefficiently depending on OS. All modern mobile SoCs have hardware clock and power gating, but if software isn't allowing the SoC to idle properly or needs to use more CPU/GPU cycles to complete tasks versus other OS, yes, you will use more power as the clocks+voltage jump around instead of going into SoC's proper sleep mode for former or will hold onto higher clocks longer for latter.

Apple makes both its hardware and software, so if you think that has no net effect, well ...

Sk0ly

Except the OS's operate in a completely different manner. Androids advantage being background functionality and iOS advantage being battery life.

marcusmarcus2

What's this "We" stuff? You are talking about physical dimensionS and hardware specificationS.
I'm talking about A physical dimension and the only hardware specification I'm talking about is the capacity of the battery resulting from it being thicker.
You don't like @Sk0ly:disqus comparing different OS's when OS's have nothing to do with the point you are making? That's funny because you are doing the same thing to me, comparing different size (height and width) phones with different specs when that has nothing to do with the point I am making.

marcusmarcus2

To be fair, @j_fuze:disqus was not comparing between OSs. He was comparing between different iOS devices. Specifically iPhone SE and iPhone 5S. You have to read a few of his comments to see what he was comparing. Either way, he missed my point by comparing different phones with different specs. My point was if ALL things being the same between 2 phones, except one had a thicker/larger capacity battery, that would give that thicker phone more battery life. I'm not sure why James is so hell bent on comparing different size phones with different specs/components.

james fuston

> James is so hell bent on comparing different size phones with different specs/components.

lol, because I'm not interested in comparing different colors of the same phone? I didn't realize we were comparing battery life of hypothetical devices.

marcusmarcus2

Colors? What are talking about now? Seriously, focus.

>I didn't realize we were comparing battery life of hypothetical devices.

I'm glad you started to finally read then and figured it out. Unfortunately, they will stay hypothetical until companies come out with devices with bigger batteries.

james fuston

Yes, colors. What other difference could there possibly be if the dimensions and specs of the phone are the same? You're 0/3 on understanding a point presented by someone else now.

marcusmarcus2

>You're 0/3 on understanding a point presented by someone else now.

haha. Lets address this part first because it is too funny. Not only can you not focus, you are delusional. You are the one who cannot get a point and you try to say I don't get a point. You are hilarious. I'm the OP of this thread of comments, you replied to me initially and you failed to understand the point. You have since replied numerous other times and have failed again and again to understand the point, each time bringing up different aspects of a phone that had nothing to do with my initial point. I get your points, but they have nothing to do with what my point is initially. Just because you can't understand that does not mean I don't get your point.

>Yes, colors. What other difference could there possibly be if the dimensions and specs of the phone are the same

Hmm. This is a tough one. Maybe battery capacity and additional thickness dues to extra battery capacity, you know, like I have said since the bigining and in every other comment since then. No other dimension and spec other than those, like I said each time. Talk about not understanding a point, you are the king of missing the point.https://media.giphy.com/media/14r9VMLSuQUzQs/giphy.gif

Lets try to make this easy for you. Try to answer the following. I'll give you a little help by giving you the answers seeing as you have trouble catching the point of this original comment thread.
Would a larger capacity battery give a phone more battery life compared to a smaller capacity battery, considering that is the only difference? Yes.
Would increasing the thickness of a battery give it more capacity, considering that is the only difference? Yes.
Would a thicker battery result in a thicker phone, considering that is the only difference? Yes.
Are there other ways of increasing battery life? (This was not part of my original point, but since you keep adding it then I'll address it) Of course, like more optimized software or more efficient parts.
Would including a larger capacity battery along with optimizing the software and more efficient parts give more battery life than optimized software and more efficient parts alone? Of course they would.
Do more efficient parts have anything to do with your point you are trying to make? No
What about color? Again, nothing to do with my point.
What about box the phone comes in? No, but I thought I'd through that in there as a guess what James might try and distract with next.

Hey look! After another 5 paragraphs he comes around to the same conclusion as the "delusional" guy. I'm looking forward to reading the next essay, keep em coming. Oh and keep posting screenshots of the up/downvotes you've enabled, it's highly entertaining.

marcusmarcus2

Not picking out only parts of my response and ignoring what you don't want to address. I have not come to the same conclusion as you. Like I said I got your point about more efficient parts. But like I said, that has nothing to do with the point I was making. I won't explain it again, I've done so enough and if you don't get it by now, then you are either a special kind of stupid, smart but to suborn to admit your wrong, or a troll who successfully trolled me. I'm done reading your lack of intelligent responses.
I'll let Bobby finish talking to you because I am done.http://pa1.narvii.com/5800/e40bec66da3b149914b3323a0a2d5e07bc96bce2_hq.gifhttps://m.popkey.co/765dfc/Re7oQ.gif

Sk0ly

This is a solid comment. I agree although I'm not sure if the SE snatches the battery life of the iPhone 6 (similar years). At the end of the day it's a proportional relationship with the screen resolution which it's one of the reasons smaller devices are lower resolution. As much as oems try to improve battery life, the screen is still by far the biggest user and has an impact on the other components in the phone. For example, the graphics processor needs to work harder and consume more power to push graphics to more pixels.

For your main argument though I agree with you. I have never thought my phone too thick. I would rather keep the phone the same thickness and increase battery size over making the device slimmer if optimizations are made in subsequent designs.

JD

The SE wasn't thinner.

Ryne Hager

Give me a OnePlus with 5000mAh and I would be so happy.

someone755

Give me a 4.7" phone like the og Moto X and I would be so happy.

Neither of us are going to be happy, Ryne.

Drakenoid

OG Moto X updated for current year would be perfect for me.

Vlad

I never broke a single headphone since I first had a smartphone in 2011 until I got a 5" phone. Since then, I need to buy new ones if I use one daily for more than 2 weeks, simply because sitting or walking up on stairs will break the cable thanks to the length of the phone.

I highly agree on the thin phones part. Bought a Huawei P10 2 days ago, for me, that thing is unusable without a case to make it a bit fatter.

Karly Johnston

If they fix idle battery drain that doesn't become an issue.

marcusmarcus2

I'm not saying they should not fix battery drain. I'm saying if they fix battery drain AND add higher capacity battery (making phone a little thicker), they could increase battery life even more than just addressing one of them. So if fixing the battery drain adds another day and a thicker battery adds another day, you'd go from 1 day to 3 days instead of just 2 days from only fixing battery drain.

Karly Johnston

The battery life the current 625 phones are getting is where flagships need to be. That should be enough for anyone.

marcusmarcus2

Everyone is not all the same. It may be enough for you. I'm saying, phones are beyond thin enough and could be thicker to increase battery life even more beyond what a 625 phone can do. Now, this is my opinion in regards to how I would like to use a phone. You are welcome to your own opinion. I'm not going to say what should be enough for anyone other than me.

Karly Johnston

The OEMs don't think that is what the vast majority of people need or want. Their target is a full day of battery life which is what most people are worried about. It isn't my opinion, it is the industry opinion of what the marketing priorities are.

X-47B

My phone has 4000 mAh battery, and it's 5.5-inch display. I easily get 2 days of battery even after heavy usage.

Installed O on my 6p and battery still drains like a whore in a bukkake twelvesome. Google really can't do nothing at this point. Android is breaking to pieces. So many things needed to be fixed in O but instead Android's got even worse. That notification empty desert area of white grey nothingness kills me the most. Hate it really bad. The last Android I liked was 6th.

catalysto

Not sure what you're talking about. Battery life on my 6P with the new O is great. Maybe you have an aging battery?

Just saying. My anecdotal evidence is as good as yours. And having poor battery life across multiple OS versions is a pretty strong indicator for a bad battery, don't ya think? In fact, I had the same problem with a previous 6P.

It started with 7.1.2.
Do you really need to be a btch when bad things happen to others?

Roy

For me everything goes smooth on my 6P on 7.1.2. so I need to complain that Android to good.

The Wrath of Kahn

If your 6P has shut down even once before reaching about 5% then you most likely have one of the defective batteries. I had to have mine replaced, but after that, it runs all day like a charm. ODP2 improved it, if anything.

Yeah you got to call Google (if you got yours from the Play Store). They've been replacing 6Ps with factory refurbished ones even out of warranty (source: it happened to me)

Matthew Skalecki

The update didn't screw up your battery. The battery was going to crap out on you regardless of which Android version you had. This happened to many people including me. Replacing the battery fixes the issue; reverting to a previous os does nothing.

Zach Mauch

Did you go through Google or a local shop?

The Wrath of Kahn

Unfortunately it was out of warranty, had a friend with the skills do it for me.

JD

I need more of this colorful imagery to describe simple everyday problems.

First off you are using a beta OS don't complain. Second thing is that battery drain comes mostly from the (bad)apps - if you watched the video or read the article you could understand. Third - I'm pretty sure you can go back to Marshmallow if you are so so so unhappy with Nougat or O.

Jakst

Really? Yesterday was my first day with Android O. I plugged my phone out at 7, and come home at midnight with 35 % battery left. I've never had that kind of battery life in my 6P before. So I've seen huge gains with this O preview.

thereasoner

The Android O beta I'm using is so slow to charge my Pixel today that it seems like that's what they tackled​....and not in a good way.

iFeign

Surprise, surprise, you're running BETA software. Smh.

thereasoner

Yeah I know and I'm sure it will get fixed between now and September. I'm just saying that the current difference in charge time is quite noticable at this point.

AbdulB1

maybe they removed quick charge support in beta

mattcoz

Pixel never had quick charge.

AbdulB1

hmm interesting. I thought it has qualcomm processor so it must have qc 3.0 too. Must be some proprietary stuff or qualcomm must be asking for more money to enable it.

mattcoz

Google is pushing the open USB-C power delivery standard.

AbdulB1

Display screen eats up most of my battery. I can't see what google is doing will fix it somehow. We need different types of screens now.

iFeign

Uhh, it's as if you expect things to use NO battery at all. Infinite battery life! Of course using the screen, aka, using the phone, is going to be the largest proportionate power drain - no matter how fancy the screen tech.

AbdulB1

battery tech has still not improved and nor did the screen tech. I can accept that the screen tech will remain same for a long time but as far as batteries are concerned they can be improved , made for longer number of recharge cycles but that hasn't caught up with the manufacturers yet. One thing which can be done is increasing the battery capacity but we all know this is not happening as phone manufactures think it will make phones bulky , add weight and in long term affect the sale of newer devices.

Latheryin

Multi day battery life will not happen until new battery tech comes around. With people needlessly having screen on times of 5+ hours there is no way to keep a battery charged for extended periods.

Krzysztof Jozwik

I average 2 hours of screen on time a day. Just because some use their phone 24/7 doesn't mean we all do.
I have a job where I'm not on my phone, at home I have better screens to get info from. The phone is there when I need it.
Your nonstop use case is not the norm.

Latheryin

As do I but that is not the norm.

Might want to look at any forum about battery life and looking at screen on times. Most want and use 5+ hours. It's mainly the older generation like us that doesn't need it and are not on the device all the time.

Krzysztof Jozwik

Obviously the forums about battery life have people winning that they want 48 hours of screen on. That is not the norm. Sure, lots of people want that, most do not.

Latheryin

Most want more screen on time. Why do you think battery life is such an issue.

disqusdeeznuts

My Moto Z Play begs to differ. Motorola does it right with this phone. It has a good size battery (3510), an efficient processor, and runs smooth. It can be done, but for some reason, it just isn't a focus for a majority of manufacturers.

Latheryin

Well sure all the devices with that mid range chip and battery combo can get ok battery life. I could easily. Get 2 days out of my device and it only has a 3200 battery.

It is not the oem. It's people. They need to spend less time look at their phone and more time living life. Which many are unprepared for.

Cakefish

I'm going the leaked Moto X4 continues that legacy onwards!

Rod

Ever heard of the Moto z Play, or Lenovo P2?

Latheryin

As already stated on that. The moto has a mid tear chip. As for the Lenovo, nope. Can't say I have, it's either not sold in my country or a mid low tier device that I wouldn't have noticed.

Just looked. They both use the same mid tier chip. Also that does have a good battery. But that like the K1000 with a 10000 battery are the exception and seldom are they flagship quality.

WarpspeedScp

The Moto z does not have an SD 820 on it. Neither does the P2. It's very annoying that manufacturers can't give us something functional instead of eye-candy for once.

Rod

While it's not top of line sillicon, real world testes have proven that, for everyday tasks, there's virtually no difference between the S625 ans 821

WarpspeedScp

Well, my phone has an SD 650, and dolphin emulator just about keeps up (wind waker and super smash Bros). On an 820, there would definitely be better results.

Paul Troy

I have a better idea. Get the hardware manufacturers to put a bigger battery in their devices. 💡

Taedirk

If we could convince hardware manufacturers to do something useful, we wouldn't be on yet another revision to how Android updates the OS.

Alex

Yeah so this way the horrible wakelocks (that Android makes almost impossible to manage) will be less visible.

Cakefish

Why not both?

Zach Mauch

All I want to know is can they stop wakelocks.

JD

Same bullshit every year. I'll believe it when I see it. Unless Android O somehow allows me to download more mAh.

Morten Ulv

Are you trying to say Android battery life hasn't improved VASTLY over the years?

JD

Yep in fact it's regressed

Morten Ulv

I have no such issues. Better battery all across the board.

JD

What ever you're smoking pass that shit around

Morten Ulv

Your shit must be stronger than mine.

browngeek

I miss the days of my Xperia Z3 Lollipop and Stamina mode. Used to get 48 hours and 5-6 hours SOT.

D13H4RD2L1V3

I hope this actually does something when the final build is out.

I'm getting tired of hearing of every new battery improvement in a new version of Android only to have a wakelock pretty much make all of that moot.

Dennis Ulijn

I am on the Android O beta, and i must say that the information i get from it it really useful! I never could find the wakelocks because i'm not rooted, but now i can easily see what apps use up battery in the background. Awake meditation app was in use for 15 minutes (meditation) and active in the background for 1 hour (basically, ever since the meditation)! "Restrict background usage" to on, and we'll see what it brings tomorrow.

PI

this is interesting .... :) ,, Whats the current update

Dennis Ulijn

I'm in Europe so I just woke up. I'll let you know end of the day.

Dennis Ulijn

k. End of the day here. The apps (pocketcasts and aware) behaved nicely now. at 23%, which is not that great with 2 hours of screen on time and 32% and 5%of the battery used up by system and services respectively. (apps 32%, system 32%, services 5%, Cell standby 3%, idle 2%, bluetooth and wifi 0%)

PI

System 32% ,,, ????

Dennis Ulijn

Yeah, last weeks i had the bug where system was using a lot of battery... I don't care right now, because i'm not expecting good battery life while on a beta. I did find a fix for system battery usage on Reddit though, which is to reset app preferences (which mostly only resets permissions and things like default apps.

PI

When in fist saw it ,,I was like WTH 32% but then it's beta software ,,so we kinda expect it . Yes per app battery usage section with foreground and background Info is really great . But I suspect google play services and Android os battery section will not be effective that much unless they show wahts making them to suck up battery .

Sabin Bajracharya

Meanwhile Google's own apps will somehow be able to bypass this restriction :D

Michael Sørensen

Google's own location services, Now cards, Chrome, etc. eats the most battery for me - even worse with location history on. How about fixing that first...?

WarpspeedScp

Try Firefox! Also, turn location off as soon as you can.

mlm5em

But with O, you can now turn off Background activity on an app specific basis.

I have concerns about this. There are some apps I *want* running in the background, but I don't want them filling up the notification shade. One example, Lightflow has to have a pointless notification in order to do the job I installed it to do.
I know it's there, any consequences for my battery life are mine to live with.

It would be OK if I could toggle a setting to permit a particular app to run a 'free running background service' silently but this is Google so I expect I'll have to put up with spam instead (and no, collapsed notifications are still notifications), or there will be a toggle that does nothing, like the 'ignore optimisation' setting that currently exists.

Drakenoid

There apparently is, check comments above, there's a screenshot.

David Onter

You can disable all notifications from an app, which removes the permanent notification.

Cakefish

It's about damn time. All hail Android O.

AdamH

So does it mean my phone will be useless?

something_new

Apple was right then

Đức Thành

I'm beginning to get excited again, even knowing that actually achieving this would take many years.

Fidelator

Allow us, the end user, to have absolute control over which apps can run in the background under certain conditions, I have disabled notifications on Facebook and Instagram yet they still have multiple persistent RAM hogging battery sucking services 100% of the time

smeddy

My next phone won't get a look-in without a 4000mah+ battery in it. Since Samsung dropped the removable battery, battery anxiety has crept back into my life.

abc

Multi-day battery life? Ha! I solved this over a decade ago. The key to long battery life is having an actual life. Have friends and family and an active social life. Don't be the loser who keeps fiddling with his phone every few mins, when everyone already knows you don't get any important messages. You'll be amazed how long your battery lasts when you aren't pulling out to jerk off on it every few mins.

And for god's sake, at home, a cell phone should be no different than a landline. If you're watching videos or playing games on your 5" inch screen, you need to invest in a PC or console.

Sk0ly

Good for Google. Some apps, particularly Facebook and Facebook messenger run ALWAYS in the background, even when you haven't used the applications in days. In my opinion, this is just lazy coding and is likely due to Facebook's data mining. In comparison, Hangouts and Allo only run on demand.

Android has always allowed developers freedom to responsibly code their apps to allow them to do more. This is recognition that this freedom has been abused and now developers have to be treated more similarly to how they are on iOS.